The case for this crappy bill

[Capn Sunshine]

See there on the left? COST? Note how it's 1/3 what STATUS QUO is?
Courtesy Nate Silver at 538.com

Senate Bill. These estimates are straightforward -- they're taken directly from the CBO's report on premiums for people at different income levels. A family of four earning an income of $54,000 would pay $4,000 in premiums, and could expect to incur another $5,000 in out-of-pocket costs. The $4,000 premium represents a substantial discount, because the government is covering 72 percent of the premium -- meaning that the gross cost of the premium is $14,286, some $10,286 of which the government pays.

One caution: this reflects the situation before the public option was removed from the bill. But, provided that the subsidy schedule isn't changed as well, that shouldn't change these numbers much.
---0------0----------0------0
Firstly, in most years, the family will not be paying $9,000. They'll be paying closer to $4,000 -- the base cost of the premium -- or maybe $5,000 for a few meds and doctors' visits and so forth. The costs will be much higher in those years when a member of the family gets sick. But the alternative in those years would be not having health insurance at all -- and in that case, either the the family member might die from the condition or the family will go bankrupt trying to prevent that.

No public option. Yet. But significant improvement over status quo. But we're not out of arrows in the quiver just yet. So keep up the noise. Except you Obama haters, cripes. Give it a rest. STFU. We're trying to get something done here. Have you noticed the opposition is spending over a million a day to defeat this? Including having shit stirrers come in here and every other goddamn place on the net to start stuff? Including fucking PRAY INs? Holy SHIT. Praying that healthcare doesn't pass. God is on THEIR side. What the fuck is THAT? That takes serious dough to produce that effect.

Whose side are we on , again?

[flamingdem]

1. Everyone needs to read this carefully

This is key. The bottom line as to what the consumer will pay is the point peops.

[Zodiak]

3. No, that is what you pay UP FRONT

The rest is what you pay when you get service or ask for service.

That part is not in this summary.

[Zodiak]

2. That looks nice

But insurance, unfortunately is not the story....the story is coverage.

Deductibles....copays....limited visits....limited networks....what about medical devices? How will the "reasonable yearly cap" be handled?

Can a family of four earning 56,000 actually pay any of those premium amounts?

Why is 2016 chosen?

Lots of questions can be asked when only a piece of the picture is given. I admit it looks sorta okay (but still sounds too expensive), but I used to work in health insurance and know lots of ways to trim fat that are not even mentioned in the bill.

Plus it does not address the effect of selling insurance over state lines, which is a new nugget that came out just today.

[Capn Sunshine]

5. Just accept it on its face, so you have the knowlege we CAN pass healthcare legislation?

Most of the negative stuff here fails to takeinto account THIS HAS NEVER BEEN DONE DESPITE TRYING FOR ONE HUNDRED YEARS!
What you need to realize is, the simple victory of anything would be sweet.
It would prove we can still win against the money machine.
Or you can believe every peice of feces flung against the wall.
Because DU is frequently like a big monkey cage.

[Zodiak]

9. You are right, being shackled to a private industry forcefully without any adequate protections

...has never been done.

Mind you, those questions are mine....not talking points. You will find that do not go into discussions without doing a fair amount of homework first.

A "victory" does not address a single issue I brought up.

this is a predatory industry that has shown no good will throughout this process, plus their spreadsheets have the blood of tens pf thousands of Americans all over them. How much are you willing to trust them once shackled to them forcibly?

[Capn Sunshine]

11. Agree with you

THis is a predatory industry. Forcibly? I don't know if the final will have that provision.

[Zodiak]

15. The individual mandate? Let's hope not

But both sides of the aisle have that interstate market thing, and that scares the crap out of me. Think of what the credit card industry has turned into because of similar laws.

[tblue]

4. Yes, we are all hearby ordered to approve of this bill or else "STFU."

Gotcha!

[FrenchieCat]

6. K&R........

Awful big chunk of Blue and Red on that Status Quo column....and no pink!


"Seriously, they're all over DU shouting 'KILL THE BILL!' ... it's the funniest thing! I guess we can take next week off."
WASHINGTON - DECEMBER 17: Sen. Jon Kyl (R-AZ) confers with Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) during a news conference by Republican Senators

[dkf]

7. But isn't the craziness that it costs almost $20,000 a year to provide

health care when you only make $54,000?

Your illustration only shows a breakdown of what the individual pays, but the cost to society is the same.

[valerief]

10. Can you think of a better way to shift wealth upward? nt

[dkf]

12. I still say if Health Care is a right, we have to look at compensation

in the industry including doctors and specialists.

[valerief]

16. Sure, but they're not the big problem. How many doctors walk off with a salary of

25 million? Nurses with bonuses in the millions?

No, the medical folks aren't the thieves (and I, actually, like the idea of very well paid doctors and nurses who hold my life in their hands). The bastards who add no value to our lives--bankers, insurance execs--are the ones who rip us off outrageously. Not as badly as the Military Money Laundering Complex, but pretty damn close.

[dkf]

20. I'm saying the entire industry needs to be viewed as a service to

society, not for gain. And ESPECIALLY insurance and pharma.

I'm not saying get rid of all the good compensation, just anything considered excessive. $25 million is way too much.

[valerief]

21. But doctors and nurses don't get 25 million. Bankers and insurance thieves do. nt

[dkf]

22. I'd draw the line at the President's salary.

[valerief]

8. Any they can still deny your claims! nt

[ThomCat]

14. And they can now charge you more if you have a pre-existing

condition.

And this doesn't include the costs of actually USING the insurance. So after paying all of this to guarantee corporate profits, will you have any money left to pay for any actual ACCESS to health care?

Now that they can all move to the state with the worst regulations, will any services be mandated by these insurance policies? Will any specialists still be covered in a few years? In cases where multiple treatments are possible, will any but the cheapest (and least successful) treatment be covered?

There are so many new questions opened up by allowing insurance plans to nationalize, while allowing insurance companies to have legal protections from lawsuits. That's a total fucking outrage! :grr:

Looking at just the bottom line for buying a policy doesn't even begin to give the full picture. But if you're a cheerleader desperately searching for something you can wave your pom poms at, I guess this will do. :(

[FrenchieCat]

17. Can you post the verbatim language in the bill that allows these things?

My understanding is that each state Insurance commissioner will have a say as to what Insurance companies can sell to those who live in their state, no matter where the Insurance company is domiciled....and in addition, there are restriction as to what the feds will allow, something that is included in the senate bill ...according to Sen. Harkin.

[valerief]

19. Give Ben Nelson time. He can't strip out everything in one day. nt

[valerief]

18. Yep, it's like buying a medical raffle ticket. You gotta buy to win, but only a few can win. nt

[tandot]

13. K & R

[TheKentuckian]

23. The numbers aren't real honest here because they do not account

for employer contributions at all. Contributions which are kept in place by a $750 fine (aka anti-incentive) to keep but are non-refundable regardless of the wages surrendered and traded to get them.

Nor is there any account for how much wages have been depressed for a generation in general to get and maintain employer based coverage.

We are at or at least damn near the point that any "win" is lip service and proves nothing to anyone. In what way are insurance or pharma profits threatened or in any way even curtailed? Their model is to get as many dollars as possible to go through their hands so they can get their piece and nothing at all is being done about that, in fact it is being reinforced by Federal dollars.

The rescissions "ban" is toothless and bogus because everyone is required to have insurance and pretty much illogical because they get to charge three times the normal very considerable regularly scheduled cost because you'd by definition have a pre-existing condition which also blunts the argument for the mandate on a private product that has no individual market for most people. We seem to still have "reasonable caps" of some sort. They keep the anti-trust exemption so the price fixing and any shenanigans they get an Itch for are on the table.

We are sure sending them a message! No longer can they refuse the well heeled a policy if they are sick!

They will accept 31 million customers at the rates they choose!!!

And to show them how serious we are that they get their asses in line, we shall speak truth to power by fining any citizen who fails to pay them but the fine will not result in any coverage and they will then have a pre-existing condition and will be pay 3X for future coverage, how 'bout them apples!!!!

They pay the million a day because of a few reasons
A) plausible deniability/the power of illusion

B) They are more greedy than a kindly soul can grasp and would prefer higher fines, negation of state regulators, ban the ability of states to make comprehensive public plans, and probably would like to be rid of the exchanges just in case.

Then there is most importantly to understand
C) They don't give a fuck about a million a day because that's a million a day more they can take from our pockets and beat us senseless with for shits and giggles like a cat playing with a mouse it can devour at any time.

[smalll]

24. Even accepting that chart (I've seen it in other threads as well) I think it's a bad deal --

If the government is going to subsidise about HALF of the whole cost of that family's health insurance -- health INSURANCE, not health CARE -- even if we ACCEPT that the roughly 20K of total cost will not change immediately because of this, surely it stands to reason that OVER TIME people's premiums (and employer cost-sharing contributions) will ineviably rise, even FASTER that they would otherwise?

Free money given by the goverment to the "insurance" companies so that The People pay less has GOT to have a hugely inflationary effect on the total price of health "insurance." I'll admit, I don't know the bill that well - who does? And so yes, there may be some (probably pretty loopholey) temporary price controls in the bill, but give it time, and the companies will find some way around that.

It won't take long before the insurance companies will end up getting MORE money for their invisible "product."

People, this is Econ 101 -- the Demand curve will shift to the right (or up, if you prefer.)



Now please don't say, anyone, that this is all suspiciously "right-wing" stuff and therefore I also must want to totally privatize medicine. No! Subsidies from the government WOULD HELP if they were subsidies paid DIRECTLY to health care PROVIDERS - doctors, nurses, hospitals - rather than to the useless "insurance" middlemen!